M/S.COOL MINDS TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: CIT(A) the it was claimed by the Assessee that deduction under Section 10B of the Act was initially claimed by the Assessee under the bona fide belief that it is entitled to deduction under Section 10B of the Act. The CITT(A) dismissed the appeal of the Assessee agreeing with the Assessing Officer and holding that the Assessing Officer was justified in not considering the claim made by the Assessee under Section 10A of the Act. Now the Assessee is in

Section 10B for the income from export of software. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Later, reassessment

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income’, no deduction shall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said provisions, no deduction under section 80IA or other

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income’, no deduction shall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said provisions, no deduction under section 80IA or other

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income’, no deduction shall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said provisions, no deduction under section 80IA or other

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income’, no deduction shall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said provisions, no deduction under section 80IA or other

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE JCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

section 147 of the ITA No.247/Coch/2017. 9 M/s.US Technology International P.Ltd. IT Act. Therefore, the assessment for the AY 2009-10 is reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act.” 5.2 The reopening of assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act was completed vide order dated 17.03.2015. In the reassessment completed, the exemption claimed u/s 10B

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this\nChapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income', no deduction\nshall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with\ndeductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said\nprovisions, no deduction under section 80IA or other

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K

10B of the I.T.Act. As regards the alternative plea of the assessee u/s 10A of the I.T.Act. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) reads as follow:- “7. Alternate claim of deduction u/s. 10A 7.1. A. Y. 2011-12:The appellant has not made any claim u/s.10A during the course of assessment proceedings. The claim made now, though grounds

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K

10B of the I.T.Act. As regards the alternative plea of the assessee u/s 10A of the I.T.Act. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) reads as follow:- “7. Alternate claim of deduction u/s. 10A 7.1. A. Y. 2011-12:The appellant has not made any claim u/s.10A during the course of assessment proceedings. The claim made now, though grounds

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K

10B of the I.T.Act. As regards the alternative plea of the assessee u/s 10A of the I.T.Act. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) reads as follow:- “7. Alternate claim of deduction u/s. 10A 7.1. A. Y. 2011-12:The appellant has not made any claim u/s.10A during the course of assessment proceedings. The claim made now, though grounds

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K

10B of the I.T.Act. As regards the alternative plea of the assessee u/s 10A of the I.T.Act. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) reads as follow:- “7. Alternate claim of deduction u/s. 10A 7.1. A. Y. 2011-12:The appellant has not made any claim u/s.10A during the course of assessment proceedings. The claim made now, though grounds

M/S.AKAY FLAVOURS & AROMATICS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesseee is allowed as indicated

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2004-05

section 10B of the I.T. Act amounting to Rs. 1,04,78,854/-. The assessment u/s. 143 r.w.s. 147 was completed vide order dated 27/12/2007. In the reassessment

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

10B as provided in s. 12A(b) r.w.r. 17B of the Rules, the ratio of the law laid down by this Court in Jaideep Industries case (supra) would not apply to the present case. 15. In view of the above, therefore, we find no merit in the argument of the Revenue that the assessee was not eligible for exemption

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

10B as provided in s. 12A(b) r.w.r. 17B of the Rules, the ratio of the law laid down by this Court in Jaideep Industries case (supra) would not apply to the present case. 15. In view of the above, therefore, we find no merit in the argument of the Revenue that the assessee was not eligible for exemption

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

10B as provided in s. 12A(b) r.w.r. 17B of the Rules, the ratio of the law laid down by this Court in Jaideep Industries case (supra) would not apply to the present case. 15. In view of the above, therefore, we find no merit in the argument of the Revenue that the assessee was not eligible for exemption

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

10B as provided in s. 12A(b) r.w.r. 17B of the Rules, the ratio of the law laid down by this Court in Jaideep Industries case (supra) would not apply to the present case. 15. In view of the above, therefore, we find no merit in the argument of the Revenue that the assessee was not eligible for exemption

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

10B as provided in s. 12A(b) r.w.r. 17B of the Rules, the ratio of the law laid down by this Court in Jaideep Industries case (supra) would not apply to the present case. 15. In view of the above, therefore, we find no merit in the argument of the Revenue that the assessee was not eligible for exemption

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

10B as provided in s. 12A(b) r.w.r. 17B of the Rules, the ratio of the law laid down by this Court in Jaideep Industries case (supra) would not apply to the present case. 15. In view of the above, therefore, we find no merit in the argument of the Revenue that the assessee was not eligible for exemption